[ ♪ music ] >> cenk: all right, welcome to "the young turks." last week on current--oh! sad! all right, well, we've got a great show for you, don't get too sad. big news day today. eric holder saying, you know what, the war on drugs, fascinating. we'll get to that in a little bit. of course i've got more on the nsa. turns out snowden was right abou, ande person who ends up pg him right is the head of the nsa program.

but first we start with, it's about stop and frisk, turns out it's not go time for stop and frisk. it's stop time. unconstitutional! what now! before i get into details let me do the panel here. kasper is here, friendly host, kind of. jayar jackson is here. the producer of "the young turks." >> your transitions are awesome. >> cenk: thank you. >> tricia rose, the professor, great to have you here. and andrew kruell. let's start on stop and frisk. first i want to show you something that the civil liberties put together. then i'll tell but the ruling. let's watch this first. >> this is the entrance where we come in, and where my son also

come in. i have to come to my bedroom window, which is on the inside of the court yard to, make sure that he gets passed safely. to run this way to come from my kitchen window which is up there to make sure that he gets through this way safely. then go to my haul door, my house door, to make sure that he gets upstairs without being stopped and harassed by police. >> you can't even walk here. you're walking on eggshells. >> it's not a pleasant experiencing to through. it's embarrassing. when you have people over, they call it fort knox. nobody wants to visit here. nobody wants to live here. >> so when we see police we don't like them. we don't talk to them. because all we see is they're abusing us. >> people pay rent and we're taxpayers and we work hard. we deserve some kind of respect and consideration from new york's finest. >> you have a lot of innocent bystanders and people that work and have a nine-to-five and they

feel that they're being harassed. it's not fair. >> well now a federal judge agrees with them. the stop and frisk 90% of the time was applied to blacks and latino even though they make up only half of the population. the ruling said the city's highest officials have turned a blind eye to the evidence and conducting in a racially discriminatory manner, in their zeal to defend a policy that they believe to be effective and they have willfully ignored he overwhelming proof that this the policy of targeting the right people is racially discouple tore. no one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go about the actives of daily life. tricia, let's ask you, she said

this violated the fourth and the 14th amendments of the constitution. but it does not end the program. it talks about laying out different reforms. do you think she should have ended the program entirely, and i just want to get your reaction to the ruling as well. >> well, i mean, over all i'm very happy there is some head way in end that is seemingly extraordinarily discriminatory policy although the fact you gave make it clear. even more so it seems that this is just a way to institutionalize what is a long-standing policy of driving while black, making sure that black people get harassed, and extra targeted across the country. they have turned it into a policy. it's important that the policy context is being challenged. you know, i think it would have been great to end it all together. i'm not surprised that she didn't, but i think that it

would have been a completely justified thing. why? why would it be a good thing to end it? because the point of the policy is really just to individually determine risk and danger and try to figure it out. the job isn't to have a policy by which they have quotas and certain numbers and they target certain neighborhoods. that's an antagonistic relationship with the community, and interest is no reason for it. but i'm not surprised she didn't end it. >> cenk: i saw the two most compelling points made in that little video they showed for you by the resident is number one, people saying we're taxpayers. we pay these cops, then they come and harass us. i thought that was a great point. the second one was how can we trust the cops if they view us as basically the enemy. mayor bloomberg is totally unapologetic about it. he said they're not targeting the minorities enough in the

stop and frisk program. >> the police have to be able to go out and stop, look for those who fit the description of a witness or a victim after a crime. they've got to make a decision. and you have to give them some broad guidelines where they can within that use what is called intuition and judgment. that's what they build over time. that's what we teach them. and sometimes they're going to be right. sometimes they're going to be wrong. most crimes in our city, serious crimes, are committed by male minorities 15 to 25. >> cenk: anand andrew, how do yu respond? >> that's the sort of thing that we have to give them broad guidelines and let them use their judgments. apparently their judgment versus been wrong because 88% of the time the people they stopped were innocent. to me it's clear that this is a

bloombergian policy and it has been all along. what is so delicious about this he fought for a long time against putting in inspector general to oversee the policy and the police, and they were running to replace him was a big advocate for that. he fought it tooth and nail. now federal government will put one in to make sure there is oversight on this political. i agree with the professor that they should have gotten rid of it all together. >> cenk: diblasio is running for mayor. he has gone from fourth to second among the primary he opponents. if he wins he'll scrap the program entirely, and he'll be done with it he gave indications that he would head in that direction. i just read that he was saying perhaps they would reform it as well. we'll see, but he's certainly the strongest opponent of it in the race. i found that encouraging.

go ahead, jayar. >> i think the problem there-- >> cenk: go ahead, what is the problem? >> i think ray kelly is influential and they support it by and large. even if d diblasio is the warrior-- >> cenk: i would immediately fire ray kelly. you're strong? be strong somewhere else because you're a goner. >> that's the problem. >> cenk: yeah, i mean, whatever. ray kelly is--no one likes abusing the constitution more than ray kelly does. he said these are not quotas because the cops say on the streets, look, we've got quotas. we have to do these 250s a certain amount of times. ray kelly is making us do them. ray kelly said they're not quotas. what did he call them? production goals. production goals.

that's awesome. >> i think it's a product of how our society is run. and how it's directed at certain folks, and you know which certain folks i'm talking about. but when you have father, sister, brother, they have to check to make sure that their family gets ms. not because of the danger of the other residents but because of the quote protectors of the community. they're going after anyone who is walking around getting into their place of residence. if no one hears that story they think, of course, there are so many minority crimes. there is no x-ray vision to see that guy is a criminal. these are humans. the police are humans, and they're making judgments off their own misconceptions, perceptions or past experience of what they i they assume is bd

applies to everyone. they are human and can make mistakes. as mayor bloomberg pointed out, sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong. would he appreciate if they showed up at his mansion? let's wake you up at 11:30-midnight and see if you want to be harassed. he'll say, do you know who i am? i'm the mayor. i can do what i want. why can't other residents who pay their salary live without it, and these are actually cases of a person's life. >> cenk: andrew is right in the number he threw out. they're only wrong 88% of the time. mayor bloomberg, i'm going to come and harass your family. i'll be wrong 88% of the time. they're not hiding the fact that this is racial.

>> in mayor bloomberg's defense of stop and frisk, he mentioned how minorities are mostly guilty of the violent crime that takes place in new york city. but instead of trying to intimidate and demonize an entire group of people, why don't you consider the fact that a lot of crimes come from people who are in lower socio-economic status. no one talks about that. they decide to pin everything on race as opposed to pinning things on wealth and equality and the fact that a huge population of people can't make ends meet. as a result they lash out in other ways. yes, some, and as you know we mentioned again and again 88% of the time they're wrong, they're focusing on the wrong group of people any way. >> cenk: i got to add two things to that. number one, if you sum up all of the property crime that happens in new york, from the lower socio-economic groups, etc. right, people who don't make as much money, it wouldn't equal close to 1% of the property

crimes committed by wall secre . and in lower manhattan i don't see that they're stop and frisked. they're above the law and we can't bother them. if we had stop and frisk in wall street, imagine how much money we would have saved taxpayers, go ahead, professor. >> you know, cenk, tieing a few things together, jayar's statement alludes the long history of criminalizing the entire black community. as soon as the emancipation proclamation began all of these rules to control black mobility, vagrancy laws, using the process of incarceration in order to profit, that is what these quota numbers are really about. this is not a small thing. and it's not a narrow thing. it's not new york city. it's not just ray kelly.

it's a much bigger process. when you criminalize a whole community you justify them being poor because of an argument, and then you emphasize whatever small--whatever negative elements might exist, and you continue the pattern through that logic. again, this is not just new york city. so it's important that we not only tackle this policy, but the logic underneath it. >> cenk: one last quote here that comes from judge scheindlins decision. she said targeting young black and hispanic men for stops based on alleged criminal conduct by other young black or hispanic men violates be bedrock princips of equality. that sums it up importantly. the due process clause that is in the fifth amendment, but also the protection against unreasonable searches and seizures in the fourth

amendment. the whole principle is don't judge me based on what other people are doing. you have to prove it in each case or have a suspicion for the stop and frisk. to say blacks and latino commit some crimes. you're black or latino, i'm going to assume you're guilty. i don't know more of an u unamerican principle. >> not for black people. for black people it is very american. >> and we praise what she did. but because of that last statement it has not done enough yet. it should be gone. it should not be a statement. it should be a policy. i don't believe in that yet. >> cenk: they should scrap the whole thing. it should not be revived in anyway, shape or form. when we come back, the obama administration heading in the right direction in the war on drug. maybe we should rethink some of our punishments. all right, do they mean it?

it's a good thing. when we come back we'll explain. if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think there is any chance we'll ever hear the president even say the word "carbon tax"? >> with an opened mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned great leadership so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter) >> cutting throught the clutter of today's top stories. >> this is the savior of the republican party? i mean really? >> ... with a unique perspective. >> teddy rosevelt was a weak asmatic kid who never played sports until he was a grown up. >> (laughter) >> ... and lots of fancy buz words. >> family values, speding, liberty, economic freedom, hard-working moms, crushing debt, cute little puppies. if wayne lapierre can make up stuff that sounds logical while making no sense... hey, so can i. once again friends, this is live tv and sometimes these things happen. >> watch the show.

>> only on current tv.

>> did anyone tell the pilgrims they should self-deport? >> no, they said "make us a turkey and make it fast". >> (laughter). >> she gets the comedians laughing. >> that's the best! >> that's hilarious. >> ... and the thinkers thinking. >> okay, so there is wiggle room in the ten commandments is what you're telling me. >> she's joy behar. >> ya, i consider you jew-talian. >> okay, whatever you want. >> who plays kafka? >> who saw kafka? >> who ever saw kafka? >> (laughter). >> asking the tough questions. >> chris brown, i mean you wouldn't let one of your daughters go out with him. >> absolutely not. >> you would rather deal with ahmadinejad then me? >> absolutely! >> (singing) >> i take lipitor, thats it. >> are you improving your lips? >> (laughter). >> when she's talking, you never know where the conversation is going to go. >> it looks like anthony wiener is throwing his hat in the ring. >> his what in the ring? >> his hat. >> always outspoken, joy behar. >> and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking?

>> only on current tv. >> cenk: the war on drugs is the stop of the 100 mph in the wrong direction which is nothing but draconian prosecution. look, good news today, eric holder announces this. >> that's why i have today mandated a modification of the justice department charging policies so that certain low-level non-violent drug offenders with no ties to large drug organizations, gangs or cartels will no longer be charged with draconian mandatory sentences. they will be charged better suited to their individual conduct rather than excessive

sentencing for drug kingpins. >> cenk: after th the war on dr, the prison population went up 800%. it's way pastime we got to these reforms. i'm glad we did. the u.s. has the most people in prison by a landslide. we hold 25% of the world's prison population even though we have only 5% of the population of the world. and the majority are in prison right now on drug offens offens. ana, you and i have covered this. is this a good start? are you encouraged? i know you think more needs to be done. but is this a good first step? >> i guess it's a good first step. i don't want the public to look at this and say, oh good, the

obama administration is being better when it comes to prosecution. remember the obama administration is doing the raids on marijuana dispensearie, and we're spending too much on incarcerating people who are caught with drugs. i don't care if it's marijuana or he heroin, people need to be given help and treatment. putting them behind bars only makes them hardened criminals. i don't think any drug offender needs to be behind bars. i think they need help. >> cenk: this ithere was anothed point made by eric holder saying if you're older and you're in prison for a non-violent offense, and we think you have absolutely no threat, okay fine, we're going to begin to let some of those guys out. should we have let them out already? i mean, if they're no threat at all, and they're senior

citizens? i don't know. that leads me to the question is this just too little? i don't want to say too late, but is this too small of an idea in terms of reform? >> well, yeah. i agree with ana a little bit in the sense that this is sort of--this maybe rings a little hollow given the administration's record of going after dispensaries and not respecting state law on marijuana. and on the other hand it's the federal government, and the obama administration is finally using executive authority for some expansion on civil liberty, however small. in his first term he closed the disparity on crack and cocaine, nice, for sure, but it's not going further as far as we would like, i'm sure. >> it's just more of that 5%

change that we keep criticizing him for. yes it's nice but this is nothing compared to the civil liberties violation that the obama administration is guilty of. i like it. i want to take it, but at the same time i don't want the public to ease up on the way the obama administration treats people who use drugs. >> it's just a simple distraction and then they get off the conversation. people who may be dealing or on drugs that are pulled, arrested and kept in prison for their entire lives. people using it are in an altered state of mind when you drink. you're in an altered state of mind when you drink too much coffee. imagine the dui and dwi that happens. you go in jail overnight to sober up, and then there ar imae people in an altered state of

mind of drunkenness who are sent to prison for the rest of their lives for having an open contain center their vehicle. people become violent, and then they can't get any other job, and they go back in the same cycle. think about we're scared of people in an altered state of mind, it's a different kind of state of mind, when it's alcohol or they're drinking, how many people are drunk in this country. >> cenk: i hear you. on the other hand when they're in an altered state of mind in marijuana imagine the damage they can do to tacos. >> we don't want to deplete our national taco supply. that's a good point. >> cenk: professor rose, here's what i'm--fair enough. here's what i'm plagued by. on the one hand the obama administration has a track record of doing a little bit of

change, 5% change, and then they hang the mission accomplished banner and say this is historic reform, and they move on with their lives. on the other hand it's a rare day where we get good news, we want to commend them and i don't want to be a sour pus about it. i'm caught in between. i'm curious what you think. >> yes, yes, well look, i do think we want to celebrate the possibility that fewer people will go to jail for less, shorter periods of time. it's so rare that prison is rehabilitating project, and there are so many ways that it has extensive ramifications. i think we want to be cautious in our optimism but we don't want to under estimate the toll on black and brown communities that will be felt for decades and decades and decades. it will be the type of thing that they'll need incarceration affirmative action they'll

resist because they claim it has happened in the past even though it has 40 years effect even more psychological and economical and otherwise. but my optimism is tempered for the same reason as everybody else on this panel. malcolm x had an apropos for this. he said, you get the money from my back, speaking of the incarceration since the 1950s. you jab it in, move it out for r or five inches and you call that progress. it's better for it to be less deep but ultimately it needs to come out, and we need a serious treatment. >> cenk: there by eliminating the professor rose will get any nomination in the obama administration. quoting malcolm x, what were you thinking. >> i didn't miss the phone calls from them, trust me. we're okay. >> i hear you on that as well.

now when we come back speaking of the civil liberties abuse, there they go again. it turns out that the former head of the nsa accidently confirming that edward snowden was 100% right on one important thing. we'll tell you what that is when we come back.

(vo) later tonight, current tv is the place for compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to th& world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. >> cenk: we're back on "the young turks." do you know where you can catch us at all times.

not only the young turks.com, but any time in the day you go to youtube/tyt, we're there with all the new stories of the day. let's talk about president obama and michael hayden the former head of the nsa and how ridiculous they're being. the nsa, we're going to fix that. we're going to have a transparency website, an oversight board that is independent. he announced that person will be james clapper, the head of the nsa. oh, how independent. and number three, then he'l he e will be a little bit more of an adversarial in the fisa court. >> obama: in an orderly and lawful process to debate the reforms, repeated leaks that

create a passionate but not fully informed way. >> cenk: president obama was just about to start that debate after he was done preventing that debate. then snowden comes in, in his non-orderly fashion, and it's true. president obama saying we would have had this conversation without snowden. >> no, i don't think edward snowden was a patriot. i called for a thorough review of our surveillance operations before mr. snowden made these leaks. the fact is that mr. snowden has been charged with three feloni felonies. [ laughing ] >> cenk: oh, i know, you started the process way before snowden. you have to understand something. james clapper the head of the nsa came out and fully lied to congress and pretty much admits it. he said it was the least

untruthful statement he can give. meaning that it was an untruthful statement. no, you were preventing the whole process. if it wasn't for snowden you wouldn't have done any of this. i love the self-justification there. well, he's charged with three felonies. who charged him with those three felonies. oh right, you did. the presiden three felonies, hee wrong. >> obama: there's no doubt that mr. snowden's leaks triggered a much more rapid and, um, passionate response than would have been the case if i had simply appointed this review board to go through and i sat down with congress and we worked this thing through. i think we would have gotten to the same place, and we would have done so without putting at risk our national security and some very vital ways we're able

to get intelligence that we need to secure the country. >> cenk: i have three letters for th president obama, l-o-l. i'm being kind. someone responded yes, it was the gardennathe guardian.com. without the guardian we wouldn't have had this transparency. and ravi said, at what point in the absence of snowden was it prompted to have this debate. was there a timeline? yes, he preempted us by six weeks but we were going to let them know this thing we've been hiding for five years under obama. and finally if you weren't sure this was prompted by the leaks, well, apparently the administration officials can confirm it for you.

here reporting on friday that nsa leaker edward snowden's unauthorized disclosures elevated the profile on these issues and required a response from the government that would build public trust. in other words, yep, it was him that made us do it. so andrew, let me start with you. on a scale of 1-10 of laughable, how laughable did you find obama's press conference? >> lol, omg, it's a 10.5 on this one. i don't know where he gets off with that. he essentially proved himself wrong. there is this cognizant disdance that we needed to have this discussion, but he's not a

patriot because-- >> cenk: because he was charged with three felonies. >> because i said so. >> it's the rationale. they start the debate that they didn't want to start, which we know that. there is a fear when there is a certain level of power. now there is a fear that now we'll get a better idea. if you have to form the debate in a certain way. this guy is not the superstar, he's not a hero, and he's not a patriot. because if you start giving these positive titles other people may do it that they may give off things that we can't recover from. and there is a fear for other things that we don't know about. there are a lot of things we have not known about. there are a lot of things that we don't know that our american government is doing. they don't want this other stuff getting out. i can see they're trying to pose it in a way that it won't now cause other people to give him

praise. >> cenk: this border on the absurd. >> it's beyond absurd. i feel that press conference was insulting to the american public. a, that we're believing that they're having a real discussion about destroying our civil liberties. and if you wanted to have this discussion why would you go after snowden so aggressively? why would you want to prosecute, and put him behind bars. who knows what they would do to him. it would be another bradley manning. we all know that. i saw that whole press conference so insulting. you don't know whether to laugh or be angry. >> cenk: yes, these guys, all throughout history, about the truth seekers, well, yeah, they told the truth, and they did it in the wrong way. professor rose was talking about malcolm x, yes, no, they said it all the wrong way. and martin luther king jr. you can't do civil di dis disobedieu

got to put him in the jail. he didn't have the right permits. did he it the wrong way. they always use that as an excuse. snowden at one point said that the nsa has turned up turnkey totalitarianism. the guy who confirms that is the former head of the nsa michael hayden. let's see how he has confirmed it. >> this is no one's proposal. you've got this meta-data here. it's now quarried under very, very narrow circumstances. if the nation suffers an attack, there are other things you could do with that meta-d meta-data. there are other tools. in that kind of emergency, perhaps you would go to the court and say now in addition to these limited inquiries we are

now allowed to do we want to launch algorithms against it. >> cenk: isn't that saying yeah, we want to flip the switch and look through that data that are much bigger violations of your privacy, we can do it. >> right, i think that, you know, the question of the sow called debate that we're supposed to have is actually less important than the fact of the entire process of gathering the data at all. once that data is gathered the question isn't what they're doing with it at the moment of gathering. the question is how much can requesbeused against future act, those who want to challenge policies, journalists, whoever the government feels--obama can't be president forever, good, bad, or indifferent, any

president, any military operation can decide this is a threat to the government, a threat to the united states, and squelch and further dampen any further power. this is a chilling effect o. we need the hard hitting journalism that we once had back on tap as a national agenda because without it there would be none of this information. not only would snowden had a place to reveal it, but no one would have published it. we're close to having no one in the u.s. ever publishing it any way. i think we have to challenge those two things very carefully. >> you know, the former head of the nsa confirms what professor rose is alluding to. if there is an attack, that's

the implicit over the top threat here. we have to take a break. but to proffe professor rose' sd point. there is another way to fix the country. it can be done. we'll tell you about that when we come back.

>> cenk: back on "the young turks." now from time to time i tell you about a group called the wolf pac. that is a group trying to get money out of politics. and isn't it hilarious that corporations are considered human beings. how insane is that? wolf pac is fighting against it. right here in california our state leaders right here, allison here in studio. it's great to have you here. i founded wolf pac and i know a lot of people who are part of wolf pac, who listen to "the young turks" or watch "the young

turks" online or interrupt, you didn't. how did you find wolf pacs? >> i was doing research online about politics, and i came across wolf pac.com. i read the plans you have, and it made sense to me, so i signed up as a volunteer. >> i didn't like to hear that you don't watch "the young turks." but did you go through all the different plans and say, this makes the most sense. >> yeah, i did. i had actually looked into other groups, i started working with other groups, but when i came across wolf pac's plan it was the most logical plan to being able to achieve what we want. >> cenk: tell me what you do in your every day job. >> i teach high school. >> cenk: why, if you're teaching high school, how did you get motivated to solve the problems of our republic, and then go

through and read all the different organizations which one had the most logical plan. >> i spent a lot of time to inspire my students to be active members of the community. we talk quite a bit about how politics influences our every day lives, particularly education. so i felt like i couldn't stand by and preach it to them. i needed to lead the way. i really agree with what so many of the leaders in this movement say, which is we can't solve these other issues until we fix the root cause of the problem, which is the big money in politics. >> cenk: right, and look, the feelings of mutual admiration is

prevalent, allison is unbelievable in california. you've got a logical mind, and you work really hard at it. one of the example you gave to me is you're meeting with your state rep. tell me about that. >> well, another volunteer in my district, he and i worked to schedule a meet with our senator. these people are so busy. they represent a few hundred thousand people. the fact that our state senator still made time to meet with us really speaks volumes to what you always say, which is our state legislature legislators ag to us. >> cenk: respect we shocked when we see actual democracy. we've forgotten what democracy is. our representative is representing us. today there is a "new york

times" article about how the banking community is so corrupt. they take tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars from the bankers, but at the state level when i hear stories like yours i'm encouraged. did they ask for any money? they had an open mind? and then what happened next. >> at the beginning of the meeting he was on his computer a lot, he was really quite frankly wondering what we were there for. i told him that i had worked on a campaign for the california disclose act which he also worked on. that opened up our conversation for him talking about why he also thinks that our democracy has been hijacked. >> cenk: how many volunteers do you have in california? >> we have quite a lot of people who are signed up in california. over 2,000 people who have signed up, 50 active volunteers.

we have amazing volunteers. people who are watching right now, i want to encourage them to go to wolf pac.com. >> cenk: do you think you'll win in california? do you think the ca california legislature will call for the passing of this amendment? >> i don't think we will, i know we will. this movement is about--it's not as much about our state legislators doing what we need them to do, but it's empowering every day citizens like myself to reach out to our state legislators. that's where i come from in california. i know we're going to make it happen. >> cenk: the reason why i love allison's story, she's a teacher, and she thinks she can help democracy, and i think

she's right. we'll win in california and then we'll go on to other states. thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> cenk: when we come back we'll break down newsroom as we do every monday. enjoy this one when we return.

>> cenk: all right, we're back on "the young turks." you know where you can find us at all times, right? the young turks.com. after all this you should know this by now. youtube/tyt any time of the day. all the news stories are right there for you. every monday ben mankiewicz is in the house. and he joins us now with ana, jayar, and ben, what have you got? >> the "newsroom," things are moving along in the program, and this week's episode was abou

about--well, a lot of it was about sexism. there was sandra fluke, and a character in the show had a relationship on wall street, she broke it off, and he posted intimate pictures of her on the internet. then there is flaggy, drinking, sleeping with a lot of men. she's in a conversation which jim, who she likes, and jim's girlfriend, new girlfriend, who was writing about sandra fluke on the "huffington post." >> i didn't read it on her blog. it was picked up by the "huffington post." >> she was very happy about th that. >> and it speaks about the epidemic sexism, and it has six things you should never say.

>> so, we love "huffington post," and you know, you and i have discussed several times since 2004, keith olberman and "huffington post" has done more about that in the country. >> before the show it was the dark ages. there was no liberal voice out there. in '05 "huffington post" comes out and then keith olberman was great, and avenues game changer. there is a lot on "huffington post." >> that's exactly right. someone writes an interesting piece about sandra fluke and sexism, and you have this barrage of nonsense sexism to

get to it. >> yeah, you got to eat. i hate those articles but the vast majority of americans do click on those articles because sex sales. it speaks poorly of our society. >> i could go the rest of my life and not click on those pictures. >> it is what it is. those are the stories that will get hundreds of thousands of views. >> cenk: but did you see how sheer scarlet johansson's address wasdresswas. >> shocking. >> cenk: is this a phenomenon that you have to grapple with online. >> sex selling is the question? >> cenk: yeah, all right. >> i couldn't quite hear you. yes, it is. i think it's one of those things

where, like she said, we got to eat, and you'll notice on tv it's one of those things where some networks take it a degree further than others. you'll notice on fox they'll use any excuse to show any video of kate upton. a politician. >> cenk: tv selling sex? no. >> it works, that's the sad thing. >> cenk: tv may have come up with that before the internet did. very good point. and the head of fox news watches it without the audio. he just watches video. that's why they have all the clear desks. you can always see the legs of women, special forces

they're under a constant threat death and torture. they come home and face threat and prison. you want to change the public perception. would you do what needs to be done?

>> do what? >> you have to fix the crazy problem. this is what happens when you make it ours. >> cenk: so yeah, that had the most unrealistic part where the guy from the nsa said if they found out they were using sarin gas. >> the answer to the question of would it reduce the loss of american life, you get the hostage out, and it was your son, you say no. if they can't use chemical warfare, then neither can the united states. >> let's go to what it is, the character sloane was dating this wall street guy. they broke up she thought

pleasantly, but he post pictures. and she wants revenge. >> can we talk for just a second? >> excuse me. [ groaning ] >> i made it to the rage. >> well, that was fun. we'll leave it right there and come back with one final point.

>> cenk: all right, i want to thank every on the panel. tricia rose, ana kasparian, from the young turks.com. and ben mankiewicz, turner classic movie.

>> rejected from brown. >> me, too, that's our connection. interesting. tonight on the young turks.com, oprah gets rejected herself from a shop pretty woman episode. mistake bye-bye. >> john: stop and frisk, the controversial anti-hate crime was deemed unconstitutional. if you're not from new york, stop and frisk sounds like a nasty gay bar from the '70s. the g.o.p. is furious that a g.o.p. supreme court upheld g.o.p. designed obamacare and they promise a repeal before it can save any g.o.p. lives. >> it is the final week of current tv which means today is the final installment of a democrat and republican playing ask a tea partier. hide the children. you've been warned. today is the birthday of the great american character actor jim beaver from breaking bad. also the birthday of mark knopfler of dire straits and george sew rose